For as long as I can remember, seeking an end to my learning and overall educational career was never a goal I had in mind.
Every time I have been in a position in my life where I felt static – not seeking new knowledge, lacking skill exploration – I craved the freedom I achieved with learning something new or refining a skill that I already had. Ultimately when it is maintained, the nature of learning has the potential to be limitless. Not only does this encourage the growth of my own ability to design and create, but it empowers my adaptability and reinforces the expectation of change before it happens. With the content I develop, the people I collaborate with, and the learners I aim to educate, this feeling is one that I hope to inspire throughout all outlets in the projects that I work on. But without understanding my learners’ needs, I am left to create something that might leave no lasting impression. That being said, my philosophy of instructional design is not just about delivering content, but rather designing experiences that are learner-centered through an empathic, collaborative, and systems-aware approach to create purposeful and engaging learning.
My Instructional Design Philosophy
Empathetic Design
At the core of anything in my instructional design journey has always been the learner. I strive for empathic design by constantly refining my ability to “to predict how the person impacted by the design (in this case the learner) will feel while engaging with the final design solution” (Tracey & Hutchinson 2019, p. 1260). But for me to really practice this, I intentionally engage with projection and reflection within my work. Through projection, I step into the learner’s role: identifying the problems they face, exploring possible solutions, and planning a creative solution, then combining it all to get a better perspective of the design. I consider a shift in their reactions by envisioning their emotions and thoughts as they progress through the experience, which often change and rarely stay the same the entire time.
Reflection then gives me the opportunity to evaluate my assumptions to create a final product that aligns and supports their needs. Experiencing the learners’ frustration, apprehension, ease of use, or satisfaction before the final product is even in their hands is the most significant source of influence on the design. As instructional designers, it is no lie to say that we wear many hats and wearing the hat of “Learner Perspective” is one that I consider to be essential. As McDonald (2022) puts it, “Being a reflective practitioner is … a type of improvisation where one recognizes possibilities as they arise…” (p. 32). Predicting end learners’ emotional experience during my design process allows for effective prototypes and a meaningful final design experience for both me and the user.
Understanding Systems
Empathic design goes hand in hand with the correlation of different systems within a project. Understanding the different levels present in an organization I might be working with and how these levels interact with each other is one of the first steps I take to create a more targeted approach with my work. Identifying discrepancies between the desired state of performance and the actual state of performance through a performance analysis that helps reveal the relationships present in each level (Stefaniak 2020). Furthermore, truly validating the instructional problem/need – even when deemed as not “necessary” by the client – is crucial to designing a solution that is actually going to address the issue and create a long-term impact.
Although these help me recognize how complex the system is, it is important for me as an instructional designer to take into account the interrelatedness while still establishing constraints. Stefaniak (2020) discusses how these constraints, contextual or design, offer the ID the ability to “direct the necessary attention to intricacies within the system, while still allowing for interaction and feedback among the objects of the system” (p. 207). This type of systems approach knowledge guides my design decisions to devise a project that is meaningful and sustainable for the learners and organizations I support.
Effective Collaboration
From my own experience within the field, as well as being a learner in general, effective collaboration is key for the transfer of knowledge. As frequently said by instructional designers, the design choices you make depend on the context of your project and its needs. However, with learning environments that might rely on social interaction (corporate training, medical education, professional development), collaboration gives way to help the instructor go from being the only source of information to the learners becoming their own. Especially with online instruction, it is easy to feel isolated – but the implementation of this theory into online spaces unlocks a deeper rooted understanding for learners. They begin to perceive the characteristics of others, which “may make learners change perspectives on the learning content or own learning processes” (Schneider et al. 2022, p.14). Something as simple as social collaboration helps by being more than just a discussion – it benefits their personal abilities of knowledge acquisition, self efficacy, and overall content engagement.
Optimize Learning With Multimedia Principles
As an instructional designer, using multimedia tools is essentially my middle name. Mayer’s principles of multimedia learning gives me the ability to optimize learning in the content I create with different tools. Two of them that I specifically align with often in my work is the spatial contiguity principle and personalization principle. With multimedia, simplicity is key: presenting images and text close together is a way for learners to easily understand the relationship between the two. Especially when it comes to directions, I ensure that they are always static on the same page as the activity. In addition, the personalization principle plays a big role in my learner-center approach as an ID. No one enjoys being talked to formally, especially not in a training they might be forced to take. Conversational, first person tones work better with almost all types of learners – but I ensure to consider my learning audience first, then customize my language accordingly.
At the end of the day, change is inevitable.
Just like the field of instructional design, my philosophy will progress and change in a similar way to how I grow as an instructional designer. The depth of knowledge provided within this field gives me the confidence to say that I no longer have a fear of change, but rather an appreciation of it. All learners are dynamic beings and the “one size fits all” notion simply does not exist in the world of learning. What does exist, however, is the opportunity that instructional designers like me get to help others by offering our skills and knowledge in a way that puts learners’ needs first. While my current philosophy might change in the future, the key components of a collaborative, empathy-driven, and systems-aware approach will always be the foundation to my work as an instructional designer.